ÿWPC=, …U:V % 0 Ü–w@r 4² Æ Õ 0 Õ 0Dõ 0J9 0Tƒ 0^× 0h5 0r 0| 0†‹ 0 1u¡ 0dU*zB)¤ BÍDCê AM-²z?,÷kñb+S`~îÞÌ D3Ô"v~#vÓ…$ 0@X* AO˜*Æç* 0D­+ D/ñ+ B ,,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ $U%U&U'U(U)U*U+D,U-Ó€ƒ‰"3|x8(Ð(3Ù—$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€ ¸XXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d d7Border 1dd€- Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ¨Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òAprilÏ17,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€ôÔAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó 5Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7À ¸XXdædæ7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€trial€court€sentenced€the€appellant€to€sixteen€years€incarceration€in€the€DepartmentÏof€Correction.Ì íÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€appellant€is€òònotóó€alleging€that€the€tape„recorded€message€was€improperlyÏauthenticated€according€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€901,€nor€would€the€record€support€such€a€contention.€€Ì çÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThe€appellantððs€threat€is€also€sufficiently€relevant€to€justify€any€prejudice€flowing€from€itsÏadmission€at€trial.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€402€and€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.€Ì !Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóAs€we€have€already€concluded€that€the€testimony€is€admissible€pursuant€to€the€moreÏrestrictive€balancing€test€of€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b),€the€testimony€is€necessarily€admissibleÏpursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€402€and€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403.Ì VÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóHowever,€with€respect€to€deliberation,€we€note€that,€in€òòGentryóó,€881€S.W.2d€at€5,€thisÏcourt€stated,€ð ðThe€[mere]€presence€of€agitation€or€even€anger,€in€our€view,€does€not€necessarilyÏmean€that€the€murder€could€not€have€occurred€with€the€requisite€degree€of€deliberation.ððÌ äÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóWe€agree€with€the€State€that€the€appellantððs€failure€to€fire€his€weapon€more€than€once€atÏthe€victim€does€not€preclude€a€conviction€for€attempted€first€degree€murder.Ì þÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ôÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóMelissa€Watkins€further€testified€that€her€father€arrived€within€ten€or€fifteen€minutes€ofÏtheir€telephone€conversation.€€When€he€arrived,€he€informed€her€that€the€appellant€was€already€atÏthe€house.€€They€then€called€the€police.€€Deputy€Franks€testified€that€he€was€dispatched€to€theÏWatkinsðð€residence€between€7:00€a.m.€and€7:30€a.m.€€Franksðð€testimony€is€more€consistent€with€aÏlater€sequence€of€events€than€that€suggested€by€the€appellant.€€Ì'ÿÿdxdPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýò òÙ€€ÙßR€!" A1-j|` | `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌà@ àSEPTEMBER€SESSION,€1996Ìó óÌÌÌÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€0301„9511„CC„00360Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àSULLIVAN€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€ò òR.€JERRY€BECKó ó,€JudgeÌò òRONALD€JEFFERY€DAVISó ó,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Attempted€First€Degree€Murder)Ìà àAppellantà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌò òGALE€K.€FLANARYó óà àà àò òà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPó óÌAsst.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌP.€O.€Box€839à àÌBlountville,€TN€€37617à àà àà àò òDARIAN€B.€TAYLORó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€AttorneyÏGeneralà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌò òSTEPHEN€M.€WALLACEó óà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌDist.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òH.€GREELEY€WELLS,€JR.ó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àò òNANCY€S.€HARRó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àBlountville,€TN€€37617Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓÌà@ àò òOPINIONó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Ronald€Jeffery€Davis,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€in€theÏSullivan€County€Criminal€Court€of€attempted€first€degree€murder.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„12„101€(1991);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(1)€(1994€Supp.).× ƒ# ××  ×€ÏOn€appeal,€he€challenges€the€trial€courtððs€admission€at€trial€of€a€tape„recordedÏmessage,€the€trial€courtððs€admission€of€testimony€concerning€a€prior€altercationÏbetween€the€appellant€and€the€victim,€and€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidenceÏsupporting€the€juryððs€verdict.ÌÌà àFollowing€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court.ÌÌà@ àòòò òI.€€Factual€Backgroundóóó óÌà àThe€appellantððs€trial€commenced€on€May€10,€1995.€€The€testimony€at€trialÏrevealed€that,€on€the€morning€of€July€11,€1994,€òòen€routeóó€to€work,€WarrenÏWatkins€observed€in€the€rearview€mirror€of€his€pick„up€truck€the€appellantððsÏmaroon€Oldsmobile€Cutlass.€€Mr.€Watkins€was€familiar€with€the€appellantððs€car,Ïas€he€had€known€the€appellant€for€fifteen€years€and€had€previously€seen€theÍappellantððs€car.€€As€the€appellantððs€car€drew€alongside€Mr.€Watkinððs€truck,€Mr.ÏWatkins€observed€the€appellant€pointing€a€shotgun€in€his€direction.€€As€theÏappellant€fired€his€weapon,€Mr.€Watkins€leaned€back€in€his€seat,€avoiding€theÏline€of€fire€by€approximately€four€to€six€inches.€€The€victim€then€applied€hisÏbrakes,€stopping€his€car€at€the€side€of€the€road.€€He€bent€down€in€his€seat,Ïbecause€he€was€experiencing€considerable€pain€as€a€result€of€fragments€ofÏglass€from€the€shattered€window€of€his€truck€that€were€embedded€in€his€arm.€ÏThe€appellant€again€drove€past€the€victimððs€truck.€€Watkins€remained€in€anÏinclined€position€until€the€appellant€had€departed.ÌÌà àWatkins€then€drove€to€the€Mt.€Carmel€Police€Department,€where€heÏreported€the€shooting.€€The€Mt.€Carmel€police€notified€the€Washington€CountyÏSheriffððs€Department.€€Deputy€Sean€Franks€of€the€Washington€County€SheriffððsÏDepartment€testified€at€trial€that,€on€the€morning€of€the€shooting,€he€received€aÏð ðBOLO,ðð€or€ð ðBe€on€the€Lookout,ðð€for€a€maroon€vehicle.€€Subsequently,€he€wasÏdispatched€to€the€Watkinsðð€residence.€€The€victimððs€wife,€Melissa€Davis€Watkins,Ïhad€called€the€police,€claiming€that€her€ex„husband,€armed€with€a€shotgun,€wasÏattempting€to€enter€her€backdoor.€€When€Deputy€Franks€arrived€at€the€WatkinsððÏresidence,€he€observed€a€maroon€Oldsmobile€in€the€driveway.€€He€walked€toÏthe€corner€of€the€house€and€observed€the€appellant€standing€at€the€backdoor,Ïholding€a€shotgun,€and€screaming.€€Deputy€Franks€arrested€the€appellant€andÏplaced€the€appellant€and€the€weapon€in€the€custody€of€Sergeant€David€QuillenÍof€the€Kingsport€Police€Department.€€Franks€testified€that€the€weapon€containedÏone€spent€cartridge€and€several€ð ðliveðð€rounds€of€ammunition.ÌÌà àDetective€David€Cole€of€the€Kingsport€Police€Department€testified€thatÏSergeant€Quillen€delivered€to€him€the€appellantððs€weapon.€€Detective€ColeÏidentified€the€weapon€as€a€Remington,€Model€1100,€12„gauge€shotgun.€€TheÏbarrel€of€the€shotgun€had€been€sawed€off.€€The€police€also€transported€to€theÏKingsport€Police€Department€€the€appellantððs€vehicle.€€The€police€recoveredÏfrom€the€vehicle€the€following€items:€five€ð ðliveðð€rounds€of€12„gauge€shotgunÏammunition;€an€empty€box€of€12„gauge€ammunition;€and€a€receipt€from€aÏKingsport€Wal„Mart€for€two€boxes€of€ammunition,€dated€June€25,€1994,Ïapproximately€three€weeks€prior€to€the€shooting.ÌÌÌà àThe€Stateððs€proof€further€revealed€that€the€appellant€and€the€victim€hadÏbeen€good€friends€since€elementary€school.€€However,€following€the€appellantððsÏdivorce€on€August€3,€1993,€from€his€wife,€Melissa,€she€and€Watkins€initiated€anÏintimate€relationship€and,€ultimately,€married€on€June€18,€1994.€€In€October,Ï1993,€as€a€result€of€Watkinsðð€relationship€with€the€appellantððs€ex„wife,€theÏappellant€assaulted€and€threatened€to€kill€Watkins.€€Moreover,€in€March,€1994,Ïthe€appellant€left€a€rambling€message,€suffused€with€obscenities,€for€Watkins€onÏhis€ex„wifeððs€answering€machine.€€The€message€included€the€followingÍexcerpted€portion:ÌÓÓà8 àYouððre€going€to€look€in€your€goddamn€car,€and€you€can€expect€theÏgoddamn€worst.€€Warren€Watkins,€youððre€a€goddamn,€low„life,€son„of„a„bitch€pussy,€buddy.€€You€mòò€€€€óó€„fòò€€€€óó,€back€stabbing€son„of„a„bitch.€€Anytime,€any€place,€boy,€you€name€it,€son.€€Your€ass,€boy.€ÏYour€goddamn€ass.€...€Youððll€live€to€regret€this€...€.€€Write€it€down,Ïboy,€it€will€come€to€a€head.€...€€By€god,€if€youððre€afraid,€you€better€beÏfòò€€€€óó€afraid,€boy.€...€€your€used€to€be€best€friend€has€become€yourÏworst€goddamn€enemy,€son.€...€€I€give€you€the€opportunity€to€shootÏme€...€Iððm€going€to€make€you€wish€you€had€...€.€€I€hope€you€enjoy€...Ïher€...€Your€goddamn€days€is€numbered€...€.ÌÌÓÓÌà àAt€trial,€Ms.€Watkins€testified€that,€although€she€and€the€appellant€hadÏagreed€to€the€divorce,€the€appellant€had€harbored€hopes€of€a€reconciliation.€ÏFollowing€the€divorce€the€appellant€suffered€episodes€of€depression€and,€duringÏthe€months€preceding€the€shooting,€exhibited€considerable€anger€toward€his€ex„wife.€€On€the€morning€of€the€shooting,€the€appellant€arrived€at€her€home,€armedÏwith€a€shotgun,€and€began€kicking€on€her€back€door.€€She€called€the€police,Ïwho€arrested€the€appellant.€€ÌÌà àThe€appellant€did€not€testify€at€trial.€€He€introduced€the€testimony€ofÏRegina€Flanary,€a€friend€of€the€appellant,€who€confirmed€that€the€appellant€hadÏsuffered€depression€following€his€divorce.€€Again,€at€the€conclusion€of€the€trial,Ïthe€jury€found€the€appellant€guilty€of€attempted€first€degree€murder.ÌÌÌà@ àò òòòII.€€Analysisóóó óÌÌò òa.à àThe€Tape„Recorded€Messageó óÌà àThe€appellant€first€contests€the€admissibility€at€trial€of€the€message€left€byÏthe€appellant€for€the€victim€on€his€ex„wifeððs€answering€machine.€€The€appellant,Ïciting€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€802,€argues€that€the€tape„recorded€message€is€hearsay.€ÏWe€initially€note€that€ð ð[a]€videotape€or€audiotape€recording€may€effectively€be€aÏððwitness,ðððð€i.e.,€the€person€who€is€in€court€and€relates€the€declarantððs€statementÏto€the€trier€of€fact.€€Cohen,€Sheppeard,€and€Paine,€òòTennessee€Law€of€EvidenceóóÏ(1995)€ðð801.3,€p.€493.€€The€recording€is€admissible€if€testimony€concerning€theÏappellantððs€statements€would€be€admissible.× ƒ$ ××  ×€€òòIdóó.€€The€State€correctly€notes€thatÏthe€hearsay€statements€at€issue€in€the€instant€case€qualify€as€admissions€by€aÏparty„opponent€and€are,€therefore,€admissible€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.Ï803(1.2).€€òòSee€also,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Keeleyóó,€No.€01C01„9403„CR„00095€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€at€Nashville,€August€25,€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Ï1996)(the€defendantððs€prior€threat€to€kill€the€victim€was€admissible€as€anÏadmission€by€a€party€opponent).ÌÌà àThe€appellant€also€asserts€that,€because€the€message€was€irrelevant€andÏprejudicial,€it€was€inadmissible€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€402€and€Tenn.€R.ÍEvid.€403.€€The€determination€of€whether€proffered€evidence€is€relevant€inÏaccordance€with€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€402€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€judge,ÏòòState€v.€Forbesóó,€918€S.W.2d€431,€449€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995),€as€is€theÏdetermination,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403,€of€whether€the€probative€value€ofÏevidence€is€substantially€outweighed€by€the€possibility€of€prejudice.€€òòState€v.ÏBurlisonóó,€868€S.W.2d€713,€720„721€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.ÏWilliamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€69,€78€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€ð ðIn€deciding€theseÏissues,€the€trial€court€must€consider€among€other€things,€the€questions€of€factÏthat€the€jury€will€have€to€consider€in€determining€the€accusedððs€guilt€as€well€asÏother€evidence€that€has€been€introduced€during€the€course€of€the€trial.ðð€ÏòòWilliamsonóó,€919€S.W.2d€at€78.€€This€court€will€not€interfere€with€the€trial€courtððsÏexercise€of€discretion€absent€a€clear€abuse€appearing€upon€the€face€of€theÏrecord.€€òòIdóó.€at€79.ÌÌà àð ðððRelevancy€is€not€an€inherent€characteristic€of€any€item€of€evidence€butÏexists€only€as€a€relation€between€an€item€of€evidence€and€a€matter€properlyÏprovable€in€the€case.ðððð€òòHuddleston€v.€United€Statesóó,€485€U.S.€681,€689,€108ÏS.Ct.€1496,€1501€(1988)(citation€omitted).€€In€other€words,€evidence€is€onlyÏrelevant€if€it€has€ð ðany€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€any€fact€that€is€ofÏconsequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probableÏthan€it€would€be€without€the€evidence.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401.€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.ÏHayesóó,€899€S.W.2d€175,€183€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Í1995).€€Whether€or€not€the€appellant,€although€ultimately€unsuccessful,Ïpremeditated€and€deliberated€the€murder€of€the€victim€in€this€case€was€aÏquestion€of€fact€central€to€the€juryððs€determination€of€the€appellantððs€guilt.€ÏClearly,€the€appellantððs€threatening€message€to€the€victim,€deliveredÏapproximately€four€or€five€months€prior€to€the€shooting,€was€relevant€to€the€issueÏof€premeditation€and€deliberation.€€The€appellant€nevertheless€contends€thatÏthe€tape„recorded€message€was€too€remote€in€time€from€the€offense.€€We€haveÏpreviously€observed€that,€ð ðwhile€ðða€lapse€of€time€may,€of€course,€affect€[theÏrelevance€of€evidence],€it€is€the€rational€connection€between€events,€not€theÏtemporal€one,€that€determines€whether€the€evidence€has€probative€value.ððððÏòòState€v.€Gentryóó,€881€S.W.2d€1,€7€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993)(citation€omitted).€€WeÏconclude€that€the€tape„recorded€message€possessed€probative€value.ÌÌà àMoreover,€with€respect€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€403,€although€the€introduction€ofÏthe€message€at€trial€was€certainly€prejudicial,€we€have€previously€observed€thatÏany€evidence€is€prejudicial.€€òòIdóó.€(ð ðthe€mere€fact€that€evidence€is€particularlyÏdamaging€does€not€make€it€unfairly€prejudicialðð).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Hunteróó,€No.Ï01C01„9411„CC„00391€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville),€òòperm.€to€appealÏdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1996).€€The€issue€is€one€of€simple€fairness.€€òòHunteróó,€No.€01C01„9411„CC„00391.€€We€cannot€say€that€the€introduction€of€the€message€wasÏunfairly€prejudicial€to€the€appellant€so€as€to€constitute€an€abuse€of€discretion€byÏthe€trial€court.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òÓÓb.à àTestimony€Concerning€the€Prior€Altercation€Between€theÏAppellant€à àand€the€Victimó óÌÌÓÓà àThe€appellant€next€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€admittingÏtestimony€by€the€victim€and€Melissa€Watkins€concerning€the€appellantððs€physicalÏassault€of€the€victim€in€October,€1993.€€On€the€occasion€of€the€assault,€theÏappellant€threatened€to€kill€the€victim,€stating,€ð ðIððll€blow€you€away.ðð€€We€agreeÏwith€the€State€that€the€appellantððs€statement€is€admissible€pursuant€to€the€party„opponent€and€state€of€mind€exceptions€to€the€hearsay€rule.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€Ï803(1.2)€and€803(3).× ƒ% ××  ×€€Moreover,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€properly€found,Ïfollowing€a€jury„out€hearing,€that€testimony€concerning€the€physical€assault€wasÏadmissible€pursuant€to€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b),€as€it€was€highly€relevant€to€theÏissue€of€intent€and€its€probative€value€outweighed€the€danger€of€unfairÏprejudice.× ƒ& ××  ×€€Again,€in€the€instant€case,€the€rational€connection€between€theÏevents,€despite€the€lapse€of€time,€is€determinative.€€òòGentryóó,€881€S.W.2d€at€7.€ÏThis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌò òc.€à àSufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óÌà àThe€appellant€next€challenges€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence€supportingÏhis€conviction.€€A€jury€conviction€removes€the€presumption€of€innocence€withÏwhich€a€defendant€is€initially€cloaked€and€replaces€it€with€one€of€guilt,€so€that€onÏappeal€a€convicted€defendant€has€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€theÏevidence€is€insufficient.€€òòState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.€1982).€ÏThe€defendant€must€establish€that€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€was€soÏdeficient€that€no€"reasonable€trier€of€fact"€could€have€found€the€essentialÏelements€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,€443ÏU.S.€307,€319,€99€S.Ct.€2781,€2789€(1979);€òòState€v.€Cazesóó,€875€S.W.2d€253,Ï259€(Tenn.€1994);€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).ÌÌà àMoreover,€an€appellate€court€may€neither€reweigh€nor€reevaluate€theÏevidence€when€determining€its€sufficiency.€€òòState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,Ï835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Questions€concerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses€and€theÏweight€and€value€to€be€given€the€evidence,€as€well€as€all€factual€issues€raisedÏby€the€evidence,€are€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€and€not€the€appellate€courts.€ÏòòState€v.€Pruettóó,€788€S.W.2d€559,€561€(Tenn.€1990).€€"A€jury€verdict€approved€byÏthe€trial€judge€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€andÏresolves€all€conflicts€in€favor€of€the€State's€theory."€€€òòState€v.€Williamsóó,€657ÏS.W.2d€405,€410€(Tenn.€1983).€€The€State€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimateÏview€of€the€evidence€and€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawnÏtherefrom.€€òòId.óó€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€75€(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àThe€State€may€prove€a€criminal€offense€by€direct€evidence,€circumstantialÏevidence,€or€a€combination€of€the€two.€€òòState€v.€Tharpeóó,€726€S.W.2d€896,€899„900€(Tenn.€1987).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€836€S.W.2d€530,€541€(Tenn.Ï1992)(ð ðthe€cases€have€long€recognized€that€the€necessary€elements€of€first„degree€murder€may€be€shown€by€circumstantial€evidenceðð).€€Before€a€jury€mayÏconvict€a€defendant€of€a€criminal€offense€based€upon€circumstantial€evidenceÏalone,€the€facts€and€circumstances€"must€be€so€strong€and€cogent€as€to€excludeÏevery€other€reasonable€hypothesis€save€the€guilt€of€the€defendant,€and€thatÏbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt."€€òòState€v.€Crawfordóó,€470€S.W.2d€610,€612€(Tenn.Ï1971).€€€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Gregoryóó,€862€S.W.2d€574,€577€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1993).€€As€in€the€case€of€direct€evidence,€the€weight€to€be€given€circumstantialÏevidence€and€ð ððð[t]he€inferences€to€be€drawn€from€such€evidence,€and€the€extentÏto€which€the€circumstances€are€consistent€with€guilt€and€inconsistent€withÏinnocence,€are€questions€primarily€for€the€jury.ðððð€òòMarable€v.€Stateóó,€313€S.W.2dÏ451,€457€(Tenn.€1958)(citation€omitted).ÌÌà àAt€the€time€of€this€offense,€the€relevant€statute€defined€first€degree€murderÏas€"[a]n€intentional,€premeditated€and€deliberate€killing€of€another."€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(1).€€Additionally,€ÌÓÓà8 àA€person€commits€criminal€attempt€who,€acting€with€the€kind€ofÏculpability€otherwise€required€for€the€offense:€Ìà8 àà8 à(1)€Intentionally€engages€in€action€or€causes€a€resultÏthat€would€constitute€an€offense€if€the€circumstancesÏsurrounding€the€conduct€were€as€the€person€believesÏthem€to€be;€Ìà8 àà8 à(2)€Acts€with€intent€to€cause€a€result€that€is€anÏelement€of€the€offense,€and€believes€the€conduct€willÏcause€the€result€without€further€conduct€on€theÏpersonððs€part;€or€Ìà8 àà8 à(3)€Acts€with€intent€to€complete€a€course€of€action€orÏcause€a€result€that€would€constitute€the€offense,Ïunder€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€conduct€asÏthe€person€believes€them€to€be,€and€the€conductÏconstitutes€a€substantial€step€toward€the€commissionÏof€the€offense.ÌÌÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð39„12„101(a)(3).€€As€to€the€requisite€culpability,€a€person€actsÏintentionally€ð ðwith€respect€to€the€nature€of€the€conduct€or€to€a€result€of€theÏconduct€when€it€is€the€personððs€conscious€objective€or€desire€to€engage€in€theÏconduct€or€cause€the€result."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„106(a)(18)€(1991).€ÏAdditionally,€premeditation€necessitates€"a€previously€formed€design€or€intent€toÏkill,"€€òòState€v.€Westóó,€844€S.W.2d€144,€147€(Tenn.€1992),€and€"the€exercise€ofÏreflection€and€judgment,"€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201(b)(2)€(1991).€ÏDeliberation€requires€a€"cool€purpose"€and€the€absence€of€"passion€orÏprovocation."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„201(b)(1)€and€Sentencing€CommissionÏComments.× ƒ' ××  ×ÌÌà àThe€appellant€argues€that€the€evidence€adduced€at€trial€did€not€establishÏthe€requisite€culpability.€€Generally,€the€State€has€the€burden€of€establishingÏpremeditation€and€deliberation.€€òòBrownóó,€836€S.W.2d€at€543.€€Again,€althoughÏthe€jury€may€not€engage€in€speculation,€òòState€v.€Bordisóó,€905€S.W.2d€214,€222Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1995),€the€jury€may€inferÏpremeditation€and€deliberation€from€the€circumstances€surrounding€the€killingÏor,€as€in€the€instant€case,€the€attempted€killing.€€òòGentryóó,€881€S.W.2d€at€3.€€OurÏsupreme€court€has€delineated€several€circumstances€which€may€be€indicative€ofÏpremeditation€and€deliberation,€including€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon€upon€anÏunarmed€victim,€the€fact€that€the€killing€was€particularly€cruel,€declarations€byÏthe€defendant€of€his€intent€to€kill€the€victim,€and€the€making€of€preparationsÏbefore€the€killing€for€the€purpose€of€concealing€the€crime.€€òòBrownóó,€836€S.W.2d€atÏ541„542.€€This€court€has€also€recently€noted€several€factors€from€which€the€juryÏmay€infer€the€two€elements,€including€planning€activity€by€the€defendant€beforeÏthe€killing,€evidence€concerning€the€defendantððs€motive,€and€the€nature€of€theÏkilling.€€€òòBordisóó,€905€S.W.2d€at€222€(òòquotingóó€2€W.€LaFave€and€A.€Scott,€Jr.,ÏòòSubstantive€Criminal€Lawóó€ðð€7.7€(1986)).ÌÌà àWe€conclude€that€the€record€supports€the€juryððs€findings€of€premeditationÏand€deliberation.€€The€record€reflects€that€the€appellant€was€angry€with€theÏvictim€due€to€the€victimððs€relationship€with€the€appellantððs€ex„wife.€€The€appellantÏthreatened€the€victim€on€at€least€two€occasions€and€physically€assaulted€theÍvictim€on€one€occasion.€€The€appellant€purchased€ammunition€three€weeks€ÌÌbefore€the€shooting.€€He€employed€a€12„gauge,€sawed„off€shotgun€toÏaccomplish€his€purpose,€aiming€his€weapon€directly€at€the€victim.€€The€victimÏwas€unarmed.× ƒ( ××  ×ÌÌà àThe€appellant€also€argues€that,€not€only€did€the€proof€at€trial€fail€toÏestablish€premeditation€and€deliberation,€but€the€proof€failed€even€to€establishÏthe€appellantððs€presence€at€the€scene€of€the€shooting.€€Specifically,€theÏappellant€contends€that,€according€to€the€testimony€of€the€victim€and€MelissaÏWatkins,€he€would€not€have€had€enough€time€to€drive€from€the€location€of€theÏshooting€to€the€victimððs€residence,€where€he€was€identified€by€his€ex„wife€and,Ïfinally,€arrested.€€We€reject€this€contention.€€The€victim€positively€identified€bothÏthe€appellant€and€his€vehicle.€€Moreover,€neither€the€victim€nor€Melissa€WatkinsÏcould€provide€more€than€an€approximate€timetable€of€events.€€Additionally,Ïviewing€the€evidence€in€a€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€Watkins€testified€thatÏthe€shooting€occurred€at€approximately€6:05€a.m.€€He€then€called€his€wife€atÏapproximately€6:20€a.m.€€Melissa€Watkins€testified€that€she€called€her€fatherÏwithin€five€minutes€of€receiving€her€husbandððs€phone€call.€€Following€her€phoneÏcall€to€her€father,€Ms.€Watkins€sat€at€a€window€in€a€spare€bedroom€of€her€house,Íwatching€the€street€and€awaiting€her€fatherððs€arrival.€€Thus,€she€arguably€beganÏwatching€the€street€at€6:25€a.m.€or€6:30€a.m.€€She€testified€that€the€appellantÏmust€have€arrived€before€she€began€her€surveillance€of€the€street.€€Therefore,Ïthe€appellant€would€have€had€approximately€twenty€minutes€to€drive€from€theÏlocation€of€the€shooting€to€the€Watkinsðð€residence.€€The€victim€testified€that€hisÏhome€is€approximately€twenty€miles€from€the€location€of€the€shooting.€€Clearly,Ïthe€appellantððs€arrival€at€the€Watkinsðð€residence€within€twenty€minutes€was€notÏbeyond€the€realm€of€possibilities.× ƒ) ××  ×€€We€note€that€the€appellantððs€timetable€ofÏevents,€set€forth€in€his€brief,€requires€that€this€court€view€the€evidence€in€a€lightÏmost€favorable€to€the€appellant.€€This€we€decline€to€do€pursuant€to€theÏaforementioned€principles€of€appellate€review.ÌÌà àWe€conclude€that€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€forÏattempted€first€degree€murder.€€Accordingly,€in€light€of€the€foregoing€analysis,Ïwe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€Judge